CDZ "Low effort" thinkers likely to be conservatives

[hadit]

The irony is that even after witnessing the collapse of entire nations with Venezuela being only the most recent example, progressives still "think" government control and central planning work!

The progressive mindset appears to fear the uncertainty and general "messiness" of freedom. They appear to want their existence designed and ordered by a force outside themselves that ensures they will avoid as much risk as possible.

 

[IcebergSlim]

CDZ=LOL

CDZ, where intolerant sissies post troll threads

lol ... You've been on a roll lately, Frank. Good one.

As for 'low information voters', how does that square with the reliance of the New Democrats on illiterate minority groups with high school dropout rates and low education levels and living in slums and barrios, and also the big role blacks and latinos in California played in passing Prop 8, for instance, and other fun facts?

We all already know no serious answer will be forthcoming from our resident pseudo-intellectual astro-turfers, so this is just a rhetorical question for practical purposes.

And let's not forget gen xand y's and 'Millennials', who are far more uninformed and inexperienced about politics than the older better educated voters, liberal and conservatives, who aren't stupid enough to believe a word coming out of the Democratic Party's PR machine; they have decades of experience watching Democrats lie through their teeth and blatantly selling out Americans since the 'super delegate rule' alleviated any need to actually represent anybody but themselves.

How many votes for Supply Side Hucksters from you?

Actually., I'm a Nader write-in voter, and a Moynihan wing liberal, but thanks for asking. You do know the neo-liberals and 'globalists', including Hillary AND her Vagina, are supply siders too ,right? They're comfortable in the knowledge their base is too uneducated and illiterate to know that and can't make the distinctions between rhetoric and actual practice.

I went 3rd party once, and ended up with Reagan......now I consider the binary choice and try to identify the rational alternative.

I see a considerable difference between Supply Side sockpuppets and those who have run against them....

 

[hadit]

To anger a conservative lie to them, to anger a liberal, tell them the truth.

Trump will lose in November. Does that make you happy?

Just to be clear, are you lying to the conservative?

 

[IcebergSlim]

The irony is that even after witnessing the collapse of entire nations with Venezuela being only the most recent example, progressives still "think" government control and central planning work!

The progressive mindset appears to fear the uncertainty and general "messiness" of freedom. They appear to want their existence designed and ordered by a force outside themselves that ensures they will avoid as much risk as possible.

As opposed to being guided by a literal interpretation of the Bible?

How long do you think you would survive in an environment of "unordered freedom"?

 

[turzovka]

I think anyone who thinks that if they think for themselves they are somehow wiser than those who rely on becoming informed or listening to the counsel of good people who have gone before them --- is fooling themselves.

So being told what to think is better than thinking?

Have you given this any thought?

Yes. And apparently more than you.

You seem to want to prevail in word trick games instead of establishing wise paths or moral truths.

I wish I had a nickel for every fool who Boldly Asserted that his/her wise path and moral truth was Indisputable.

That's right. God is just a cranky old prankster. He created mankind just to watch them bump into eachother like a pinball machine because they have been given no moral truths or revelations of their Creator to hang their hat on. Nothing can be proven, no sign from God at all who He is or what is our purpose for existence. Apparently it's all for God's entertainment to watch us attack one another and make an unexplainable mess of it all.

Sounds like the easy way out to me. A convenient excuse to do whatever you want because there is nothing that can be known.

And yet, under the watchful eye of your god, "we" have been doing so for 2000 years......while subjects of other gods have resisted.

If you do not have enough motivation to find out the truth about who God is and just lazily claim no one knows who God is because there are so many --- then I cannot help you.

It's actually a stacked deck for anyone gifted enough to have a minor level of intelligence and no partisan beginnings. The Judeo-Christian god IS G-d. It overwhelms all other claims of deities based on many, many factors. The historical record, the empirical evidence, the evidence for miracles, the charity and goodness, the defense of the indefensible, the healings, the many prophecies fulfilled, the miracle of the Jewish people and their survival ---- it all points to the One true God. Not Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, animism, confucionism, tribal gods, any past religions can come anywhere near providing evidence.

So whatever you were trying to say in your post I could not understand. But I still say to you and others, we are not fooled by your lame ways of trying to say one cannot know who God is. And surely you are not fooling God Himself --- that should be your foremost concern.

 

[hadit]

The irony is that even after witnessing the collapse of entire nations with Venezuela being only the most recent example, progressives still "think" government control and central planning work!

The progressive mindset appears to fear the uncertainty and general "messiness" of freedom. They appear to want their existence designed and ordered by a force outside themselves that ensures they will avoid as much risk as possible.

As opposed to being guided by a literal interpretation of the Bible?

How long do you think you would survive in an environment of "unordered freedom"?

Are you leaping immediately to the extreme of anarchy? I would hope that you are not, because that is an extremely weak debate tactic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Turzovka, when you go all Catholic evangelical, your nonsense is obviously nonsense.

Lean on Jesus and let up on the church, OK?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am aware that you are a low effort thinker, and you must step up your cognitive game. You are intelligent but lazy.

Jake, I am trying to help save your immortal soul. That is not being lazy.

Actually it's being an arrogant, tedious twit who needs to mind his own business.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jesus calls me by my first name, Tur, and I call him Lord, as I hope you do, too.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Father Bonnell may be who you are channeling .from St. Rose of Lima.

The Bishop forced him to retire and put him under a vow of silence at the monastery.

At least his soul was saved, probably, after a thousand years in purgatory.

 

[turzovka]

Turzovka, when you go all Catholic evangelical, your nonsense is obviously nonsense.

Lean on Jesus and let up on the church, OK?

That makes no sense to me, Jake.

Jesus very well knew that man would end up interpreting the prophets and contemporary followers of Jesus for themselves. In other words, they would define their own “gospel” which would suit their lifestyles or earthly desires without putting any difficult roadblocks in the way --- and also think they were one of God’s loyal subjects. That is human nature.

So Jesus knew He had to establish an authority here on earth to be the ruling body in faith matters and to settle differences. In fact, it was the early Church leaders who decided which books were divinely inspired and should be included in sacred Scripture and which were to be rejected.

So now you go to Scripture and you read in Matthew 16 where Jesus established His Church on earth and makes Peter its first head. He also establishes apostolic succession for future generations. Authority given to those ordained to forgive sin or hold it bound, and also to consecrate bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Himself. I know how Protestants love to go through theological gymnastics to dance around those verses. Anyway, in Matthew 16 Jesus says this >> And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.<<

Isn’t it obvious? There is One True Church established by Christ to be heaven’s authority. Made up of sinners, yes, but still led by the Holy Spirit. What they rule on spiritual matters heaven abides with. Protestantism is lacking in so many critical ways. They claim the Bible as the authority yet they all differ on what it is saying and worse, they ignore those teachings which make the Catholic Church look so right and they so wrong. And so, I cannot lean on Jesus without leaning on His Church.

 

[JoeMoma]

Off topic: Why 320 Years of History? Why not 500 years or 200 years?

 

[Coyote]

Guys - remember, this is the CDZ zone...no putting folks down etc etc

 

[miketx]

To anger a conservative lie to them, to anger a liberal, tell them the truth.

Trump will lose in November. Does that make you happy?

Lie smoke spin...fail.

 

[320 Years of History]

For some reason the link in my OP to the paper titled "Low-Effort Thought Promotes Political Conservatism" is broken. Here again then is the link: Low-Effort Thought Promotes Political Conservatism.

 

[320 Years of History]

The progressive mindset appears to fear the uncertainty and general "messiness" of freedom. They appear to want their existence designed and ordered by a force outside themselves that ensures they will avoid as much risk as possible.

Red:
If one clicks on the link in the OP to the thread/post that inspired this thread, one'll find in that other thread a link to a document in which the following is among the researcher's findings:

Many different theoretical accounts of conservatism over the past 50 years have stressed motivational underpinnings, but they have identified different needs as critical. Our review brings these diverse accounts together for the first time. Variables significantly associated with conservatism, we now know, include:

• fear and aggression
• dogmatism [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogmatism]
• intolerance of ambiguity
• uncertainty avoidance
• need for cognitive closure
• personal need for structure
• terror management
• group-based dominance
• system justification.

The specific trait/motivation you've noted is explicitly noted as being one of the etiologic forces associated with individual's espousal of conservatism.

 

[candycorn]

To anger a conservative lie to them, to anger a liberal, tell them the truth.

Trump will lose in November. Does that make you happy?

Lie smoke spin...fail.

Glad to see you can sum up your daily activities.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Turzovka has every right to want to believe that the RC is the Holy Mother Church authorized to speak for God and Jesus.

Everyone else has every right to say "no, that is not so."

The atheists and agnostics have every right to say "believers are crazy."

But let's do it nicely.

Turzovka, please lean on the Lord more and pray for clear sight.

 

[Picaro]

Atheists and agnostics ARE higher level thinkers.

Agnostics, like Huxley, yes; atheists like Dawkins and his cult, no.

There is no logic and reason in believing in a god.

There is no logic and reason in believing there isn't some force that can fit such attributes, either, hence why agnostics are more skeptical of both 'sides' attempts at exerting so much energy pointlessly trying to discredit the other, when there is no real conflict going on. Most people don't really know what they're talking about when they use the term 'logic', for one. It isn't all encompassing nor definitive. It's an exercise in circular reasoning in all cases. Wisdom is having a feel for when to jump off the circle instead of continuing in circles of ever narrower absolutist gibberish.

There is no emperical evidence for such.

There is no empirical evidence for the current fashions in evolutionary 'science', either; it's completely a matter of 'faith' as well.

The fact you think atheists and agnostics are not high level thinkers is a perfect example of what the OP is suggesting.

Many of them aren't, they're just fashion victims and poseurs. Many are narcissists who buy the myth that if they merely parrot others and no real grasp of what they're saying, that's enough, since it's all about appearances and identifying with a peer group, not objectivity or 'rational' choice. One hilarious example was Dawkin's attempt at refuting Thomas Aquina's Five Ways, and just ended up making an idiot out of himself. The same with his rationalizations of the gaps and lack of randomness in the evolutionary evidence chain by some bizarre hand waves re 'punctuated equilibrium' and other gimmicks, something that as a biologist he should have been smart enough to avoid altogether. Typical case of fatuous arrogance over-riding logic.

F.A. Hayek, an atheist himself, in his book The Fatal Conceit, has some very interesting commentary on religion in general and Christianity in particular, and how 'rationalism' is at best inadequate as guiding principle, while evolutions of 'traditions' and religious thought in the more sophisticated theologies has served society much better in the long term both culturally and practically; rationalism' fails outside of small successes precisely because the absolute knowledge necessary to make rational decisions is impossible to possess, especially for any single person, but collective sensibilities in a society can provide approaches that can successfully overcome problems eventually, i.e. acting as a pool of collective experience. It is well worth a read on the conflicts of morals and reason, and instinct and reason.

You don't have to a 'libertarian' or be a fan of his economic thought to appreciate his deconstruction of the 'rationalism' conceit.

 

[miketx]

To anger a conservative lie to them, to anger a liberal, tell them the truth.

Trump will lose in November. Does that make you happy?

Lie smoke spin...fail.

Glad to see you can sum up your daily activities.

You think you're real clever don't you? Shills like you got nothing but a paycheck that will end come november.